DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Status
Claims 1, 5, 16 and 22 are amended. Claim 17 is cancelled. Claim 23 is added. Claims 1-16 and 20-23 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/20/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
4. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/18/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 6/18/2026 with respect to claims 1-16 and 20-22, have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
6. Claims 1-5, 8-13, 15-16 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US. Pub. No. 2025/0286601A1) in view of Padhy et al. (US. Pub. No. 2020/0313748 A1) and further in view of Bhamri et al (US. Pub. No. 2023/0396307A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses a user equipment (See Zhang; Fig. 10; UE 1000) comprising: at least one processor (See Zhang; Fig. 10; Processors 1004); and
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the at least one processor (See Par. [193] and Fig. 10 of Zhang for a reference to one or more non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions to be executed by one or more processor of the UE), are configured to cause the user equipment at least to:
predict, for at least one beam received from an uplink node, at least one duration for which a channel quality will satisfy a quality threshold (See Par. [15], [97]-[100] and Fig. 7 of Zhang for a reference to that in response to receiving, by the UE, from the gNB 710 [Uplink Node], a configuration associated with at least one beam, the UE, and based on performing beams measurements, predicts the dwelling time of the beam, which is a time duration during which the beam has a beam quality better than a quality threshold); and
report the at least one duration to the uplink node (See Par. [101] and Fig. 7 of Zhang for a reference to the UE 720 indicated the prediction to the base station 720, by sending the beams dwelling time report to the BS).
Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the reported at least one duration is for at least one beam that satisfies the quality threshold for at least a time period defined by a duration threshold.
However, Padhy discloses wherein the reported at least one duration is for at least one beam that satisfies the quality threshold for at least a time period defined by a duration threshold (See Par. [61], [82]-[84], [114] of Padhy for a reference to the beams measurement report includes stored duration value (i.e., a stored dwell time value) that satisfies a duration threshold, which determines that the condition is satisfied [Beam Quality Condition]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Padhy to Zhang. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by enabling the UE to prioritize selection of the beam with better quality [beam associated with a dwell time that is greater than or equal to a threshold]. (Padhy; Par. [90])
The combination of Zhang and Padhy does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one duration is based on at least one of: a sequence of previous accelerometer measurements of the user equipment, a sequence of previous orientation measurements of the user equipment, or a sequence of determined locations of the user equipment.
However, Bhamri discloses wherein the at least one duration is based on at least one of: a sequence of previous accelerometer measurements of the user equipment, a sequence of previous orientation measurements of the user equipment, or a sequence of determined locations of the user equipment (See Par. [67], [70], [88], [104] of Bhamri for a reference to the dwelling time [Validity Periodicity for each beam] is determined based on the location and the reported direction/speed/rotation of the UE [Option 3 is cited]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bhamri to the combination of Zhang and . The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by enabling low latency, accurate and efficient beam-based transmissions for mobile UEs, especially in FR2 and beyond, through relating to the beam dwelling time and the dynamic movement, such as position, speed, orientation, and/or other movement characteristics of the UE. (Bhamri; Par. [17])
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein: the at least one beam comprises multiple beams (See Par. [49], [52], [64] and Fig. 2 of Zhang for a reference to the configuration received from the gNB is associated with different beams [more than one beam]. The gNB transmits multiple SSBs, wherein each SSB in a different beam); and
the at least one duration comprises multiple durations (See Par. [101], [176]-[177] and Fig. 2 of Zhang for a reference to that based on measurements, performed by the UE, on the configured multiple beams, a report comprising multiple dwelling times is generated and transmitted to the BS).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, are configured to cause the user equipment further to: predict the channel quality for the at least one beam (See Par. [44], [49], [90] of Zhang for a reference to the reference signals include channel status information reference signal (CSI-RS) that is used for beam management reference signals are transmitted on the different beams. The UE predicts channel quality based on RSRP and/or SINR measurements).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein the at least one beam comprises at least one of: a set of beams configured by the uplink node; at least one beam associated with downlink control channel reception for the user equipment; at least one beam associated with downlink data channel reception for the user equipment; at least one beam associated with uplink control channel transmission by the user equipment; or at least one beam associated with uplink data channel transmission by the user equipment (See Par. [54], [57], [98] of Zhang for a reference to the beam comprises a set of beams that are configured by the gNB [UL Node] or it can be associated with downlink control channel (PDCCH) received from the gNB [Option 1 & 2 are cited]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Zhang and Padhy, specifically Zhang discloses wherein the at least one duration is based on at least one of: a sequence of previously-measured channel qualities of the at least one beam; or an antenna configuration of the user equipment (See Par. [54], [57], [98] of Zhang for a reference to the dwelling time [Duration] is predicted based on a set of past measurements performed on previously received reference signals on the beam [Option 1 is cited]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein predicting the at least one duration is performed by at least one of a long short-term memory recurrent neural network implemented by the user equipment or a recurrent neural network implemented by a communication network that includes the uplink node (See Par. [69], [76] and Fig. 3 of Zhang for a reference to an artificial intelligence (AI) model is implemented as a neural network 320. The neural network 320 includes a long short-term memory (LSTM) layer 324, responsible for predicting the dwelling time of a beam. The neural network 320 is used locally at the BS or can be used locally at the UE).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein the channel quality is predicted by a long short-term memory recurrent neural network implemented by the user equipment (See Par. [49], [69], [76], [90] and Fig. 9 of Zhang for a reference to the neural network 320, that is used locally at the UE, includes a long short term memory to measure/predict the RSRP/SIBR/CQI [Channel Quality]).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein the channel quality includes reference signal received power (RSRP) (See Par. [15], [49], [71], [77] of Zhang for a reference to the AI model at the UE predicts the channel quality of all beams. The channel quality includes of all beams. The channel quality includes RSRP measurements of the beam).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein the channel quality includes a signal-to-interference-and-noise ratio (SINR) (See Par. [15], [49], [71], [77], [81] of Zhang for a reference to the AI model at the UE predicts the channel quality of all beams. The channel quality includes of all beams. The channel quality includes SINR measurements of the beam).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein the prediction is based on information received from the uplink node (See Par. [98]-[99] and Fig. 7 of Zhang for a reference to prediction of dwelling time of a beam is based on configurations received from the gNB 710).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein the predicting is performed at periodic intervals (See Par. [54]-[55], [65], [163] of Zhang for a reference to the gNB configures the UE to send beam reports [Including quality measurements and dwelling times] repeatedly over periodic occasions).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri, specifically Zhang discloses wherein the predicting is performed in response to a prediction request received from the uplink node (See Par. [110]-[112] of Zhang for a reference to the UE is triggered to perform beam predictions and report it to the BS, based on a prediction request received from the BS).
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, are configured to cause the user equipment further to: predict and report separate durations for control-channel beams and data-channel beams, the control-channel beams being subject to a lower quality threshold and a longer duration threshold, and the data-channel beams being subject to a higher quality threshold and a shorter duration threshold.
However, Padhy discloses predict and report separate durations for control-channel beams and data-channel beams, the control-channel beams being subject to a lower quality threshold and a longer duration threshold, and the data-channel beams being subject to a higher quality threshold and a shorter duration threshold (See Par. [89]-[91] of Padhy for a reference to determining the beam dwell time depends on the duration threshold, as well as the RSRP [Quality] threshold. The quality threshold of data channel beams is higher than the quality threshold of control channel beams, and the duration threshold of data channel beams is shorter than the duration threshold of control channel beams).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Padhy to Zhang. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by enabling the UE to prioritize selection of the beam with better quality [beam associated with a dwell time that is greater than or equal to a threshold]. (Padhy; Par. [90])
Regarding claim 21, Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the reporting includes, for each reported beam, a beam identifier and a predicted quality value for the reported beam.
However, Padhy discloses wherein the reporting includes, for each reported beam, a beam identifier and a predicted quality value for the reported beam (See Par. [77], [79]-[80], [84] of Padhy for a reference to the UE reports, for each beam that satisfies the quality threshold, the beam identifier and the measured RSRP [Quality] value).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Padhy to Zhang. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by enabling the UE to prioritize selection of the beam with better quality [beam associated with a dwell time that is greater than or equal to a threshold]. (Padhy; Par. [90])
Regarding claim 22, Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the duration threshold is defined as the minimum period during which predicted channel quality of a beam needs to remain above the quality threshold in order to report the predicted duration for the beam.
However, Padhy discloses wherein the duration threshold is defined as the minimum period during which predicted channel quality of a beam needs to remain above the quality threshold in order to report the predicted duration for the beam (See Par. [82], [99], [160] of Padhy for a reference to the duration threshold is a relative value that can determined based on the minimal dwell time on which the beam quality exceeds the quality threshold. The dwell time is reported by the UE).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Padhy to Zhang. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by enabling the UE to prioritize selection of the beam with better quality [beam associated with a dwell time that is greater than or equal to a threshold]. (Padhy; Par. [90])
7. Claims 6-7, 14 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. in view of Padhy et al. in view of Bhamri et al. and further in view of Bala et al. (US. Pub. No. 2024/0244460 A1).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri does not explicitly disclose wherein the reporting the at least one duration includes at least one of: reporting up to k beams that, wherein all k beams satisfy the quality threshold for the time period defined by the duration threshold; or reporting up to k beams that satisfy the quality threshold for longest predicted durations, wherein all k beams satisfy the quality threshold for at least the time period defined by the duration threshold.
However, Bala discloses wherein the reporting the at least one duration includes at least one of: reporting up to k beams that, wherein all k beams satisfy the quality threshold for the time period defined by the duration threshold; or reporting up to k beams that satisfy the quality threshold for longest predicted durations, wherein all k beams satisfy the quality threshold for at least the time period defined by the duration threshold (See Par. [58], [71]-[72], [78] and Fig. 11 of Bala for a reference to the UE may predict the top K best [highest] beams out of all possible beam points. The UE measures the RSRP of the top K best beams, and transmits a report including the best RSRP of the top K beams to the BS. Alternatively, the UE may report all K beams that satisfy the threshold with the predetermined validity duration).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bala to the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by finding a preferred set of TX/RX beams by performing beam sweeping for improved SNR. (Bala; Par. [62])
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri does not explicitly disclose wherein k is a value received from the uplink node.
However, Bala discloses wherein k is a value received from the uplink node (See Par. [58], [68], [71]-[72] and Fig. 11 of Bala for a reference to the best beams number N/or K is configured by the base station [UL node]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bala to the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by finding a preferred set of TX/RX beams by performing beam sweeping for improved SNR. (Bala; Par. [62])
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri does not explicitly disclose wherein the predicting is performed in response to at least one new measurement performed by the user equipment.
However, Bala discloses wherein the predicting is performed in response to at least one new measurement performed by the user equipment (See Par. [68] of Bala for a reference to the best beam prediction may be continuously updated [predicted] based on new measurements and CSI reports).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bala to the combination of Zhang, Padhy and Bhamri. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by finding a preferred set of TX/RX beams by performing beam sweeping for improved SNR. (Bala; Par. [62])
Regarding claim 23, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 7.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rao et al. (US 2023/0337269 A1) discloses methods, architectures, apparatuses, systems directed to extended reality-assisted radio resource management.
Balasubramanian et al. (US 2022/0201668 A1) discloses wireless communications, including zone based operating mode configuration.
Chavva et al. (US 2021/0351885 A1) discloses methods and systems for reporting CSI and selecting optimal beams using ML.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to RASHA FAYED whose telephone number is (571) 270-3804. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00AM-4:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Primary Examiner, Shah M. Rahman can be reached on (571)272-8951. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/R. F./
Examiner, Art Unit 2413
/UN C CHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights